|
CounterPunch
October
22, 2002
War-mongering
and Iraq
A Game of Chess with Lives at Stake
by LINDA HEARD
As Washington does a soft shoe shuffle to appease
its detractors in the United Nations Security Council and agrees
to changes in the wording of the proposed new Iraq resolution,
American President George W. Bush considers an Israeli proposal
to destroy Iraqi missiles in Iraq's western desert.
The proposal involves a joint U.S.-Israel
mission whereby American Special Forces would be used, backed
by Israeli intelligence, and is said to have been put to the
U.S. administration by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon during
his recent visit to the American leader in Washington.
Israel is actively encouraging the U.S.
to invade Iraq and has threatened to retaliate should it be
the recipient of Iraqi missiles as it was in the 1991 Gulf War.
But, unlike his father, who managed to restrain the Israeli
government of the day, Bush junior appears to have given Sharon
the green light to enter the fray.
At the same time, Bush has approved the
training by the U.S. military of 5,000 would-be combatants selected
from Iraqi opposition groups, an exercise expected to run to
the tune of $92 million. This could indicate that the Pentagon
is contemplating a similar model for warfare as the one used
in Afghanistan where the Pentagon used the Northern Alliance
as a proxy army.
Congressional
resolution
On October 16, the American President
signed a Congressional resolution, which sanctions his authority
to use any necessary force to dismantle Iraq's suspected weapons
of mass destruction. Said Bush soon after: "This nation
will not live at the mercy of any foreign power or plot".
These aggressive measures by Washington
are hardly conducive to optimism that peace will win through.
Will the U.S. back off from its stated intentions to effect
a regime change even if the UN Weapons inspectors return to
Baghdad? Will it allow itself to be guided by the restraining
hand of the UN member states?
Both George Bush and U.S. Defence Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld have said repeatedly that America will not shy
away from a unilateral approach if it deems that Iraq still
poses a threat to its interests.
Amr Moussa, Secretary-General of the
Arab League, has urged Baghdad to cooperate fully with the UN
and warned America that any strike on Iraq would be likely to
ignite Mid-East public opinion, which is already angry and frustrated.
The ubiquitous Arab street is infuriated
at seeing Palestinian children being gunned down in the West
Bank and Gaza on a daily basis; angered by the attacks on Islam
and the Prophet by U.S. television evangelists, such as Jerry
Fallwell and Pat Robertson, not to mention being outraged at
the racial profiling targeted at Arabs entering the U.S.
Starting this month, most Arab visitors
to the U.S. will be fingerprinted, photographed and even interrogated
by immigration officials at U.S. airports and border crossings.
Saudi Arabia seems to have decided that enough is enough and
has introduced a reciprocal policy applicable to Americans
entering Saudi, as well as to those already resident in the
kingdom.
Jordan doesn't appear to be putting much
stock in the return of the inspectors dissipating the clouds
of war, and believes that conflict may still be on the cards.
King Abdullah told the German magazine Der Spiegel that while
peace has a chance, Jordan is taking steps to protect itself
from exposure to chemical and biological weapons.
Wedged between Israel on the one side
and Iraq on the other, Jordan is in a precarious position. If
the U.S. were to go it alone, Jordan would no doubt face a huge
influx of Iraqi refugees fleeing the conflict along with anti-U.S.
demonstrations in the streets of its capital.
There is also the scenario that Ariel
Sharon could use any U.S.-Iraq conflict to further his long
time dream of a greater Israel and force the West Bank Palestinians
across the Jordan River, under the pretext that as allies of
Saddam Hussain, they posed a threat to Israel's security.
President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt believes
that the United States would be better employed working on ways
to stop Israeli aggression in the Occupied Territories than
preparing to attack Iraq.
Mubarak faces the spectre of dwindling
tourists, a worsening economy and growing anti-Western feeling
among his people if an attack were to take place. Such an unhealthy
set of circumstances could represent a breeding ground for
religious extremism, which the Egyptian government has been
fighting for decades.
Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa,
the Prime Minister of Bahrain, has urged the Arab world to hold
an emergency summit, saying that suggestions that Iraq poses
a threat are 'mere exaggerations". Sheikh Khalifa represents
the view of most of the Gulf States, with the possible exceptions
of Kuwait and Qatar.
Nobody is more sceptical of Washington's
attempt to mollify members of the UN Security Council than Iraqi
Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz who said resignedly: "The U.S.
will act unilaterally and not consult with anyone".
In an emotional public acceptance of
a new seven-year term of office, shown in its entirety by CNN,
the Iraqi President said: "Our friends everywhere. You
are facing the U.S. policy of hegemony, which seeks the path
of blood and violence as well as the means of destruction."
Judging by Saddam's recent actions he
is likely to be a master chess player. In recent months he has
thwarted every American ploy in his direction by agreeing to
almost every UN demand, showing groups of Western journalists
around facilities suspected by Washington, and hosting a group
of U.S. Congressmen.
Further, amid Washington's allegations
that the Iraqi people would be delighted with a regime change,
Saddam called a national referendum on his continuing presidency
and has apparently received the full backing of his people to
continue for another seven years.
Under intense provocation, the Iraqi
leader has managed to refrain from the use of threatening rhetoric
towards the U.S. and has made it clear that although he does
not relish the thought of war, he is prepared to face whatever
comes.
In a further show of good faith on the
part of Iraq, Kuwaiti and Iraqi officials met at the border
of their two countries on Saturday, under the auspices of the
UN, to organise the return of tonnes of Kuwaiti archives, which
were taken from Kuwait during the Gulf War.
In fact, Saddam is beginning to appear
positively benign after Sunday's strategic release of most of
the prisoners in his jails, including political prisoners. Yet
another move which pulls the rug from Bush's personal attacks
on the Iraqi leader.
While the American administration's motives
for a proposed attack on Iraq are already suspect, they have
been further highlighted by last Friday's announcement by North
Korea that it is developing nuclear weapons, despite an earlier
agreement not to do so, brokered by ex-President Jimmy Carter.
While perturbed by the North Korean statement,
both Condoleezza Rice, US National Security Adviser, and Rumsfeld
have seemingly shrugged off the North Korean threat, preferring
to keep any response on the backburner while still focusing
on Iraq.
Rumsfeld went as far as saying that North
Korea only has two or three (nuclear missiles) in a tone implying
that these were a mere drop in the ocean and hardly worth worrying
about. The Defence Secretary is also strangely comfortable
with Israel's 300 or so nuclear warheads even though the region
is highly volatile.
Since North Korea also forms part of
Bush's infamous "Axis of Evil" it is surely surprising
that the US considers the invasion of Iraq, which is now intent
on cooperating with UN demands, as its highest priority. Simply
put, why is Iraq a greater threat to world peace and security
than North Korea?
When it comes to North Korea, the U.S.
administration is quick to point out that problems with North
Korea's nuclear proliferation can be sorted out diplomatically
- an option, which it is reluctant to offer Baghdad.
Right on the button
In this light, perhaps Sheikh Khalifa
was right on the button when he recently said: "The continuous
threats to wage war in this vital region are not intended to
enforce the return of the UN weapons inspectors to Iraq but
to dominate this Arab country".
The bottom line is Saddam is not a threat
to world peace or American lives but to America's ambitions.
A report, compiled by the Baker Institute
for Public Policy and commissioned by American Vice President
Dick Cheney, who also heads the White House Energy Policy Development
Group, lends transparency to the true intentions of Washington's
Hawks.
The report, entitled Strategic Energy
Policy Challenges for the 21st Century, concludes: "The
United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma... Saddam
Hussain has also demonstrated a willingness to use the oil weapon
and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets.
"Therefore, the US should conduct
an immediate policy review towards Iraq, including military,
energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments".
Bush's earlier statements of wishing
to democratise Iraq and free the Iraqi people from their "evil
dictator" ring hollow too, since America's plan for Iraq
after Saddam was leaked.
Confirmed by Colin Powell as one of the
options on the table is the insertion of an American military
government in Iraq with someone like Brigadier General Tommy
Franks, Commander in Chief of the US Central Command, at its
head.
In this lengthy game of chess with people's
lives as the pawns, Saddam is currently emerging as the victor.
World opinion is on the side of the Iraqi people.
On the other hand, if the United States
engineers an invasion of Iraq, the black 'knight' will have
moved and the entire world checkmated.
Linda Heard
is a writer, editor and Arabist, who has lived and worked for
most of her life in the Middle East.
She can be reached at: freenewsreport@yahoo.com
Yesterday's
Features
Edward Said
Israel,
Iraq and the United States
Pat Califa
The Necessity of Excess
Michael O'McCarthy
George W. and Alcoholism
Michael Ortiz Hill
Bush's Armageddon
Obsession
Elaine Cassel
Anti-Terrorism: a history of abuses
Russell Mokhiber and
Robert Weissman
Bowling for Baghdad
Anis Shivani
A Left Critique of Multiculturalism
Anthony Gancarski
Concerned Citizen: Episode 4
New
Print Edition of CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- How to Change the Subject: Corporate Scandal and Pension
Reform as Weapons Against Warmongering;
- Padilla's Predecessor: Court Ruling Cites 1904 War
Against Mining Union;
- Adios Hitchens: the Dorian Gray of Our Time;
- Object of Suspicion: How the FBI Watched Janis Ian
From Birth;
- First Carter, Then Clinton,
Now Sen. John Edwards:
Another "New South" Slimeball;
- Corporate Crooks: Nature or Nurture?
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
Or Call Toll Free 1 800 840 3683
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|